IEEE International Conference on Software-Science, Technology &Amp; Engineering (SwSTE'07) 2007
DOI: 10.1109/swste.2007.12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing the Object-level behavioral complexity in Object Relational Databases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Physical database scheme quality control is impossible without numerical indicators [4], [8]. In the absence of quantitative measurements, it is difficult to make any design decisions.…”
Section: Problem Statementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Physical database scheme quality control is impossible without numerical indicators [4], [8]. In the absence of quantitative measurements, it is difficult to make any design decisions.…”
Section: Problem Statementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The system adopts a semi-automatic prefetch technique based on user hints for performance improvement. Justus and Iyakutti [18][19][20] discussed various metrics for measuring static/dynamic status of an object database. In [18], two object-level metrics, called coupling and cohesion, were presented for measuring an object's runtime status.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 shows the algorithm which returns an iterative pattern view V that best matches the given subgraph S of a TLAG T based on Definitions 1 and 2. The algorithm first finds all the iterative pattern views matching the given subgraph S in lines (1)- (16) and then selects an iterative pattern view with the minimal cost in lines (17)- (18). To find all the matching iterative pattern views, for each of the TLAGs T V for the iterative pattern views in the database, the algorithm checks if ASE (1) in Definition 2 is satisfied in the lines (3)-(7), and CASE (2) in lines (8)- (15).…”
Section: Rulementioning
confidence: 99%
“…dynamic or runtime metrics) (2) the static nature of the system which reflects the internal quality and that can be measured at the design time (i.e. static metrics) [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%